I argue that confronting Iran and its proxies was a necessary, hard choice, one that finally gave hope to millions in the Middle East who want normal lives, not endless conflict. The cost has been real and tragic, but standing down would have cost far more in freedom and lives over time.
Thirteen Americans returned in caskets and hundreds more are wounded, and that loss matters deeply to those of us who love this country. I did not grow up American by birth, I chose it, so loss hits me personally and politically. That pain does not negate the need to confront clear, long-term threats that have terrorized an entire region.
For decades a small group in Tehran exported violence across borders and propped up militias that crushed hope in Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen. Young people across the region want jobs, startups and normal lives, not martyrdom or perpetual war. When leaders in places like the Gulf pursue reform and investment, they build alternatives to the chaos Tehran promotes.
We have seen what stability produces. Cities that were once deserts are now hubs for trade and talent, and parts of Iraq created space for persecuted minorities to find refuge. Those examples show a practical truth: when people can work and innovate, they invest in peace. The real fight is not against a people, but against violent networks that profit from disorder.
Too many past presidents downplayed this threat or tried to paper over it with deals that quickly unraveled. Strategic patience turned into strategic decline when it let terror groups grow stronger and more brazen. A different approach was overdue: one that names the enemy, supports regional partners and acts to prevent further attacks on allied countries.
Since the recent confrontations began, Iran has targeted nations that chose Western partnership and regional reform, but those nations have not lashed out in return. That restraint matters and it shows who the aggressor is. When the United Arab Emirates and others absorb attacks without retaliation, it underscores their desire for a future free from coercion.
The cost of silence is clear. Pullbacks and weak responses create vacuums that groups like ISIS or Iran-backed militias fill, and ordinary people suffer the consequences. When leaders fail to hold aggressors accountable, the violence migrates and becomes harder and costlier to fix later. Confrontation now is painful, but it prevents a longer, bloodier slide into chaos.
I have walked through neighborhoods hit by missiles and seen families driven to flee at night with what they can carry. Those are human moments that shape judgment and policy. They remind us that this is not an abstract power play but a fight over whether millions will live under fear or have a chance at normal lives.
Regional reformers are not naive. They know allies can grow tired and go back to business as usual, and that fear of lost interest is a real concern. The moment to cement change is when the coercive networks are weakened and local leaders invest in institutions, education and economies that lock in progress.
America’s role is not to occupy or remake societies, but to defend partners who choose a different path and to apply pressure where violent actors block common sense progress. Supporting economic opportunity, protecting shipping lanes and confronting proxies is a practical, conservative policy that defends national interest and human dignity. If the world steps back now, the worst actors will regroup and the region will lose this opening for generations.
History is not kind to those who look away when threats expand. Investing steadiness and strength today gives young people across the Middle East the chance to build startups, pursue careers and raise families without living under the shadow of militias. That is the kind of future worth standing up for, even when it costs us dearly in the short term.
